Johanna Rubba wrote:
>
> It's really nice to hear from teachers out there in the K-12 trenches on
> what they need and want to share.
>
> About the terminology thing: I don't think there would be all that much
> change. Here's a list of terms I use in my linguistics classes, with
> examples: (Sorry for the weird spacing, this is from a web document)
>
> Noun
>                           dust, figure, idea, flute,
>                           happiness
> Verb
>                           dust, figure, fail, know,
>                           reciprocate
> Adjective
>                           tall, unknown, flimsy, gleeful,
>                           blue
> Adverb
>                           slowly, soon, carefully, down,
>                           first
>
> Closed Class = Closed System =  Function Word = Grammatical Word
>
>  Preposition
>                             in, at, above, for, down, near,
>                             up, between
>  Proform
>                             we, she, there, then, so, like
>                             that
>  Determiner
>                             a, the, some, my, his, all, that,
>                             those
>  Qualifier
>                              (aka Intensifier;
>                             Degree-word) very,
>                             somewhat, quite, rather,
>                             really, hardly
>
>  Conjunction
>                             and, but, or, for, because,
>                             although, while
>  Particle
>                             pick up, turn on, drop off, fool
>                             around
>  Expletive (aka Dummy
>  subject)
>                             it, there
>  Interjection
>                             Rats! Dang! Wow
>
> 'Expletive' is used differently; and there are more distinctions within
> the 'article' category, etc. And terms that aren't on this list -- such as
> subcategories like count/mass noun, in/transitive verb,
> attribute/predicate adjective, etc. Are still either widely used or widely
> understood in linguistic work.
>
> I think the bigger challenge will come when the _way_ terms are used is
> negotiated: I had pretty serious arguments with teachers at a workshop
> last September over whether the 'diamond' of 'diamond ring' should be
> called an adjective or a noun. I was going with the 'absolute' category of
> 'diamond' as a noun, and most of the teachers were going with its
> 'modifier of noun' function, which is usually accomplished by adjectives.
> I think it's in details like this that the devil, as Ed has said, lies.
>
> Some hints of other potential difficulties were mentioned in my last
> posting, viz., saying that pronouns replace nouns. The definitions of the
> above would also be a point of contention. TG (trad. grammar) holds that a
> noun 'is a name of a person, place, or thing', which is true, but not
> sufficient to define all nouns. I would go with a form-based definition,
> such as 'a noun is a word which can stand alone after <the>'. I believe
> that all noun, and only nouns, in the English language (except proper
> nouns of course) are covered by this definition. It works great for my
> students, once they  learn to trust their unconscious native-speaker
> knowledge of English.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Johanna Rubba   Assistant Professor, Linguistics              ~
> English Department, California Polytechnic State University   ~
> San Luis Obispo, CA 93407                                     ~
> Tel. (805)-756-2184     Fax: (805)-756-6374                   ~
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]                           ~
> Office hours Winter 1999: Mon/Wed 10:10-11am Thurs 2:10-3pm   ~
> Home page: http://www.calpoly.edu/~jrubba                     ~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
unsubscribe me thanks